Legislators ratify Everglades settlement

The Florida Senate put the legislative stamp of approval on the landmark settlement between Gov. Rick Scott, the federal government and the sugar industry Thursday passed a bill to dedicate state money and establish criteria for restoring water quality to the Everglades.

The bill, HB 7065, which had earned the rare support of most environmentalists and sugar companies, will be accompanied by a $70 million investment in the clean-up efforts which are included in the proposed $74.5 billion budget. The Senate approved the measure 39-0 after the House approved it last month 114-0. Gov. Rick Scott is expected to sign it.

The passage comes a day after the governor signed two legislative priority bills on campaign finance and ethics. The Senate had put on hold a vote on the Everglades bill as well as the confirmation of the governor's top agency heads.

Scott entered into the settlement with the Obama administration last year and quietly considered it a priority to have the legislature ratify the language and create a framework for funding the restoration projects.

"The unanimous, bipartisan support in both the House, and now the Senate, to move Everglades legislation and restoration forward proves the success of true compromise and what we hope will be a lasting collaboration between legislators, farmers and environmental groups," said Robert Coker, vice president of U.S. Sugar in a statement.

"We've been working on these issues for more than 20 years and remain committed to striking the balance that allows farmers to grow food, contribute to a strong economy and also continue to serve as partners in the state's restoration plans," he said.

Blog Search

About the blog

For Florida political news today, the Buzz is your can't-miss-it source. Tampa Bay Times writers offer the latest in Florida politics, the Florida Legislature and the Rick Scott administration. Keep in mind: This is a public forum sponsored and maintained by the Tampa Bay Times. When you post comments here, what you say becomes public and could appear in the newspaper. You are not engaging in private communication with candidates or Times staffers.